Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

And to be sure, the worst aikidoka of all was (aside me), of course, Ueshiba. He knew aikido, and yet he did nothing to teach it martially. When we see his pupils training, we often see them training exactly in that utterly fictional manner that yields an utterly unusable aikido that then generates this type of thread, that exists only in aikido forums for no other martial art raises so insistently this type of issue.

Bottom rock: we agree, actually. Not that the other way round would have worried us, of course.

Alberto:

I respectfully disagree with your statement regarding how the training was done directly under O'Sensei. My sources come directly from direct students of O'Sensei- one who I study directly with. The training that went on at the Hombu dojo was not fluffy or unrealistic. In many respects, it was a dog-eat-dog environment with all of the students trying to out-tough each other. What you see on the video clips does not give an accurate representation of how they trained at the hombu dojo. Aikido, as it was taught by O'Sensei was martially viable and was/is demonstrable in the shihans who trained directly under him. I have seen enough examples of people who have tried out what they though would work with my teacher to know full well that what was taught to my teacher was and is martially viable.

Only Aikido.
But we should ask ourselves why it is so, rather than dismiss the phenomenon as something that visits us for unfathomable reasons.

Quote:

If you want it to work, you have to fight with it a long time, because the nature of aikido is that of being ineffective.

Quote:

Because there must be a reason this type of thread gets produced only on Aikido forums.

I think part of the dfficulty is phrasing like this. It doesn't only come up on Aikido forums. The nature of Aikido isn't ineffectiveness. Your analogy of the thunderstorm is something all people, let alone stylized practicioners, have to deal with.

Quote:

90% of a martial oriented training should not be geared to learn a proper techinique, but how to live within the thunderstorm.

I think 100% of martial training should be geared toward learning proper technique, which to me includes how to hit something hard (a hard surface) and how to execute movements under stress.

Because I am not led by self delusion and anger Mary. The point is there in clear sight: everybody who can see, sees it. Not just me.
Relax, and you will see it also. Because there must be a reason this type of thread gets produced only on Aikido forums. The explanation cannot be that, for unknown reasons, there is just a bigger amount of morons in aikido...

I think it's a bit unnecessary to lay a dig into Graham while being critical of someone else.
That being out of the way, I think it's asking for trouble any time someone claims to be free of self-delusion...except me of course. I'm the exception that proves the rule. Any errors on my part are purely for your own benefit, folks.
Have a nice day. The sun is shining brightly in the Pac NW...as if to say, "so long Seattle, see ya when I see ya." Time to soak up some sunshine.
Take care,
Matt

I'd just like to thank Jesse from the bottom of my heart for necro'ing this thread.
He earns the golden-hakama award too for including a variation of 'grab my wrist';

Quote:

Jesse Dollarhite wrote:

...If he grabs my wrist, I can immediately go to ...

Alberto is making a great load of sense but his huge arrogance sounds abrasive!
We should take the 'tone' with a pinch of salt though since he's typing in English ever so well and I'm guessing his Italian could convey nuances much better.
I for one think that training in the 'thunderstorn' is best saved for maybe once-a-month sessions, it being a bit too randomly dangerous.

Maybe you and Graham ought to get together for a drink. Or, you know, whatever enlightened beings like yourselves do instead of drink.

Mary, now you want to be insulting.
If you have a personal issue with me, I have nothing against it, though I have none against you. If you want to insult me, please use the pvt messages.

However, mind your hints because being so intentionally ambiguous in your allegations implying that, since you disagree with my statements, therefore I may be under the influence of some substance (alternative to drinks), and/or that me and Graham may be (or should be?) entertaining some sort of not better qualified activity ("whatever ") together, does not qualify me, whilst it totally disqualifies your contribution.

I don't want to return the favour of hinting that you may have written this nasty reply while having some kind of drink with friends - although that would, indeed, be the only circumstance that might excuse such a string of gross innuendos.

I am hoping you were so naive to be totally unware of them - and yet there they are.

However, to keep the ball on track (to the others): my point is that we have not addressed the reason of why Aikido is so often exposed to this type of accusation (how startling this thread is for its length and its pageviews, is something that has been stressed long enough already by others, so I won't need to re-empahsize this fact).
Implying that this type of accusation flung so frequently at aikido (that it is ineffective), is flung at us for unknown reasons or because for some other unknown reason we would have in aikido a larger amount of silly persons, is in my perception the element that has never been addressed. We don't want to face the actual reasons, maybe: this could be why we produce fictional reasons such as malicious aikido-bashers intent on casting disrepute on our otherwise immensely martially effective Art.

And my answer is that the reason this happens so often wtih Aikido, is that Aikido is ineffective in a "real" fight - because having no competitions it never developed a truly martial ground as its default playground, and because most dojos, given the nature of Aikido, train in an unrealistic manner. You may like it or not, it still holds true.

In order to make Aikido effective against real crude violence you have to make a doubled amount of efforts than those required in other martial arts - which is why normally aikido is not effective (not many would thake that length of pains in order to make it usable in a real fight against a competent attacker), and why this type of threads occur.

This type of threads populate more tipically aikido forums, because there is some truth in them!

I'd just like to thank Jesse from the bottom of my heart for necro'ing this thread.
He earns the golden-hakama award too for including a variation of 'grab my wrist';

Alberto is making a great load of sense but his huge arrogance sounds abrasive!
We should take the 'tone' with a pinch of salt though since he's typing in English ever so well and I'm guessing his Italian could convey nuances much better.
I for one think that training in the 'thunderstorn' is best saved for maybe once-a-month sessions, it being a bit too randomly dangerous.

English is not my native language. If there are nuances in my English, there are significant chances I may be totally unware of them. However we should not focus on the fact a sentence like being free of "self-delusions" may seem exaggerated: I was saying that I was writing in a mood free of self-delusions at that moment (want to use instead: serene, perhaps?), not that I am free of self-delusions every instant of my life gee lol

As for the thunderstorm, if you practice it once a month it is an option - but the fact is that it should be practiced daily; once a month, you do the stylish stuff :-)

I know that many persons who are not used to train with the thunderstorm daily consider it dangerous. The fact is, it isn't. It's mostly something in the imagination, or related, probably, to the fact that since many dojos maximize memberships, this policy automatically goes against any wide implementation of martiality. You cannot propose the thunderstorm as a regular workout to 60 yo guys with no previous training, or to ladies that, clearly, have (and rightly so) no intention to go martial.

The only cautions you need to take are, if punches are thrown, to throw them with open hand and at chest level, and tpo avoid concluding aikido throws (once - and if- you are properly set and you conquered your grab and position, the technique is inescapable, so it may suffice to give a mere taste of the throw rather than fulfilling it).

Actually, concluding a kotegaeshi (something that I guess most dojos normally do) is already very dangerous and yet we have been doing it all the while: a full projection determined by a kotegaeshi may throw a person so badly, that s/he may land on his/her neck.

well said - as a matter of fact, though you proposed it somewhat humorously, it is so well said that it should be taken utterly seriously.

I have no idea how aiki could be. But I have some background with philosophy (which to me has always been something dramatically practical, and not speculative): the day we get "aiki", and if we get it, it will be unmistakable.

I am unsure whether it has to do with meditation or pranayama - I'd cast my two cents on the latter, for a bet.

We call it aiki, in fact: but it is not something that belongs to aikido or that aikido invented, but only something that aikido renamed. Actually, it is immemorial, existed already for Patanjali, and has been called the Tao, the Atman, the Illumination and in many other ways - perhaps we should remind that sentence by Eugen Herrigel (I quote by heart) «Since immemorial times, at the door of the dojos where the sword was practiced, was shown this sign: "Place of the Enlightenment"».

You can arrive at "aiki" with the sword, or with aikido, or as a monks with prayers & meditation or with ascetic exercises. It is afforded to very few.

If you find it, you won't need any training anymore. Techniques would flow out of your hands tapping directly from that mental storehouse where they have been residing since ever, as the obvious and most proper reactions to any type of incoming action.

If you get aiki, you will be tumbling tigers with a buff. All your nadis will be responsive, Ida and Pingala both fully cleared, and throughout your body will flow such an enormous and terrifying amount of energy, thet you will only need to move a finger in order to get the strongest physical effects. Which, by the way, is what I argue and suppose was truly meant when it was said: you need to use only a minimal amount of Force.

Of Force. Not of force. Of the latter, you always need much.

If I think of that, it makes me crazy. As Plato would say, we already know the true effective aikido - only, we have forgotten it.

And, of course, when you have aiki, you will not speak of it anymore - which is why I do so much lol.

I was only half-joking of course, as I think that once one gets or is exposed to aiki, most of these discussions about whether aikido works or not become moot. I'm not familiar with some of the terms you mention (I'll have to Google/Bing them). For me aiki is a skill, not unique to aikido as you say, that is very real (not mythical or spiritual) and can be demonstrated and trained and it's utterly convincing when encountered. It's also very rare in aikido, despite the art's name. It has to do with the Asian model of ying-yang (in-yo) and the "marriage of opposites". Among its benefits are superior balance, kuzushi upon contact, and sophisticated handling of forces. It has nothing to do with techniques, although you still need techniques to perform in whatever venue you choose (aikido, mma, etc.).

Like I said I have very little aiki and cannot even manifest it yet in regular aikido training, let alone in more live training, and even less in "fighting" if I were to do that. (My shortcomings are my own and not due to the potential of aiki or any training method. There are people who can totally kick ass with it.) So in my opinion if one were to submit some absolutist view on the subject of "aikido works" and/or "fighting", one should at least be well versed in aiki, aikido, and fighting. I personally cannot make any absolute claims on the topic as I lack the breath of experience and knowledge on some of these subjects (that's why I said in my previous post "I dunno... I'll let you know when I get enough aiki [and learn how to fight I might add]). Being in some street situations -- everybody's been there and has stories -- or even doing some combat sports does not make one an authority on fighting. Having trained in aikido dojo or having rank or whatever does not guarantee one knows aiki or how it works. So in other words some of the people submitting their judgment about aikido from all corners of the Internet don't have enough information or experience to make such claims. The main reason there are so many threads like this all over is because aikido is widely misunderstood both inside and especially outside the art.

The only strong advise I'll offer is this: have fun. If you are really interested in aiki/do, go find it, train it and have fun doing it or fighting with it if you wish. If that didn't do it for you, research and find another place or move to a different art. Some people seem to be stuck on the fence for years, or obsessed with putting down or trying to "save" some art they don't fully understand. $0.02

...As for the thunderstorm, if you practice it once a month it is an option - but the fact is that it should be practiced daily; ...
The only cautions you need to take are, if punches are thrown, to throw them with open hand and at chest level, and tpo avoid concluding aikido throws (once - and if- you are properly set and you conquered your grab and position, the technique is inescapable, so it may suffice to give a mere taste of the throw rather than fulfilling it)....

Oh. I take it all back. Your thunderstorm is obviously very very different to my thunderstorm,
this forum always throws up such huge chasms between individual practices and assumptions of others' practices. Amazing.

well said - as a matter of fact, though you proposed it somewhat humorously, it is so well said that it should be taken utterly seriously.

I have no idea how aiki could be. But I have some background with philosophy (which to me has always been something dramatically practical, and not speculative): the day we get "aiki", and if we get it, it will be unmistakable.

I am unsure whether it has to do with meditation or pranayama - I'd cast my two cents on the latter, for a bet.

We call it aiki, in fact: but it is not something that belongs to aikido or that aikido invented, but only something that aikido renamed. Actually, it is immemorial, existed already for Patanjali, and has been called the Tao, the Atman, the Illumination and in many other ways - perhaps we should remind that sentence by Eugen Herrigel (I quote by heart) «Since immemorial times, at the door of the dojos where the sword was practiced, was shown this sign: "Place of the Enlightenment"».

You can arrive at "aiki" with the sword, or with aikido, or as a monks with prayers & meditation or with ascetic exercises. It is afforded to very few.

If you find it, you won't need any training anymore. Techniques would flow out of your hands tapping directly from that mental storehouse where they have been residing since ever, as the obvious and most proper reactions to any type of incoming action.

If you get aiki, you will be tumbling tigers with a buff. All your nadis will be responsive, Ida and Pingala both fully cleared, and throughout your body will flow such an enormous and terrifying amount of energy, thet you will only need to move a finger in order to get the strongest physical effects. Which, by the way, is what I argue and suppose was truly meant when it was said: you need to use only a minimal amount of Force.

Of Force. Not of force. Of the latter, you always need much.

If I think of that, it makes me crazy. As Plato would say, we already know the true effective aikido - only, we have forgotten it.

And, of course, when you have aiki, you will not speak of it anymore - which is why I do so much lol.

I'm not sure that any of those earlier references (Plato, Herrigel, etc.) really capture what "aiki" is supposed to be. Different folks have different opinions, I guess. Ledyard Sensei has written some posts on this that seem pretty good to me. For what it's worth, my sense is that "aiki" has a different meaning than "enlightenment," or than the generic, zen-based mastery of mind/body fusion that masters of many martial arts achieve. I studied briefly over the years with karate and kung fu teachers who clearly were very skilled in their arts, seemed like enlightened people, and also seemed to me to have well developed "ki" (whatever that means). But I still don't think that's the same thing as "aiki."

My loose sense is that aiki isn't just about spirituality, or zen-mastery, or high-level practice of a martial art. Rather, aiki somehow combines the whole zen-mastery thing with physical blending, and with being able to respond to an aggressive attack without force-on-force deflection, but in a way that amplifies and reshapes attacker's motion and momentum into a profound loss of balance. I certainly don't have this kind of "aiki," and probably never will (although I still feel physically that I move more gracefully through my activities of daily life when I train).

But does "aiki" exist? I've seen a few people who embody it (to some degree), and who can respond to real world attacks in ways that I can't. It's not magic or "the Force." It probably does involve a level of skill equivalent to what a concert pianist does with his or her musical instrument. Does "aiki" work in actual combat? Like virtually anything else, the answer almost certainly is, sometimes. It depends. Moreso for some than for others.

I'm not sure that any of those earlier references (Plato, Herrigel, etc.) really capture what "aiki" is supposed to be. Different folks have different opinions, I guess. Ledyard Sensei has written some posts on this that seem pretty good to me. For what it's worth, my sense is that "aiki" has a different meaning than "enlightenment," or than the generic, zen-based mastery of mind/body fusion that masters of many martial arts achieve. I studied briefly over the years with karate and kung fu teachers who clearly were very skilled in their arts, seemed like enlightened people, and also seemed to me to have well developed "ki" (whatever that means). But I still don't think that's the same thing as "aiki."

My loose sense is that aiki isn't just about spirituality, or zen-mastery, or high-level practice of a martial art. Rather, aiki somehow combines the whole zen-mastery thing with physical blending, and with being able to respond to an aggressive attack without force-on-force deflection, but in a way that amplifies and reshapes attacker's motion and momentum into a profound loss of balance. I certainly don't have this kind of "aiki," and probably never will (although I still feel physically that I move more gracefully through my activities of daily life when I train).

But does "aiki" exist? I've seen a few people who embody it (to some degree), and who can respond to real world attacks in ways that I can't. It's not magic or "the Force." It probably does involve a level of skill equivalent to what a concert pianist does with his or her musical instrument. Does "aiki" work in actual combat? Like virtually anything else, the answer almost certainly is, sometimes. It depends. Moreso for some than for others.

Yes true, it is possibile that in the tradition bequeathed to Aikido, by "aiki" it is meant something that is not "Enlightenment" - though seems akin to it, to some degree.

However, it is curious that in this context you too mention Zen: that is, you too feel (as an intuition) a proximity. I sensed it too.

There is a strange fact with Zen, that is better emphasized if we consider the Chinese version of Buddhism.

I was reading a few weeks ago a text by an Italian author (a good text but no special reason to recommend it, anyway. Good texts about Zen abound) and the author was, apparently, very surprised in noticing what follows:

some texts reported that, as it was customary in Zen monasteries, the Master was used to hit his disciples with a stick. Why?

In at least two cases it was reported that two pupils (one of them named Lin-chi) attained enlightenment. They said to their Master they did. The immediate reply was that the Master tried to hit them with his stick (replace a stick with a sword, and we're fully engaged in Martial fields!).
Now, the pupils happened to react immediately, dodge the hit and hit the Master squarely (it was also added: producing a terrifying shriek...). Whereupon the Master concluded "he is truly enlightened".

What surprised the author was this connection: the fact that a spiritual attainment like Enlightenment could be corroborated via a... martial test.

I elaborated with a lengthy footnote this thing, though it is in Italian so it could be of any interest (if any at all) only for those who understand Italian: here.

What I say there is that I am much less surprised than the author: in fact I think the reason Enlightenment was tested via martial proofs (which is what made me link aiki with Enlightenment) is perfectly consistent: a mind that is finally at rest, and which has quit following visions, delusions and fears, is quintessentially apt and perfectly equipped, even lacking any previous specific martial background, to exhibit a symmetrical and simultaneous prompt reactivity to any incoming challenge, and particularly to lightening and ultrafast sudden and unexpected challenges, for it is no longer trammelled by bias, obstacles and prejudices.

When we fail we don't fail because the incoming action was too much for us: we fail because it is our mind that makes us fail. A freed mind, fights very well.

Oh. I take it all back. Your thunderstorm is obviously very very different to my thunderstorm,
this forum always throws up such huge chasms between individual practices and assumptions of others' practices. Amazing.

Ok, I explain this better.
Those who advocate the thunderstorm, forget safety measures.
Those who stress safety measures, avoid the thunderstorm.
A solution is in demand.

My approach: randori on steroids.

Safety measures:
1) uke throws punches with open hands
2) uke throws at chest level
3) Nage does not conclude the throws, but only gives a taste of them.
4) neck grabs are forbidden: a mere 15 kilos pressure on a neck may cause damage.

Steroids:
1) uke attacks as if he has a very personal matter with you
2) no shokomenuchi and yokomenuchi, those are too stylized and won't represent a real situation
3) uke throws what he wants - nage will not know what technique will be required
4) uke will not accommodate the technique (because of... point 3) - in case he realizes what is going to be done, he will do all he can to escape and counterattack
5) uke throws and rechambers as fast as he would in a real situation
6) uke throws, rechambers and is swift to face you again if you try to go lateral: he will not make that easy for you
7) uke pursues and stalks you
8) uke can pull you, push you, and do all in his power to "win".

Those who advocate the thunderstorm, forget safety measures.
Those who stress safety measures, avoid the thunderstorm.
A solution is in demand.

You would probably like this example of Seagal's shodan test. What you describe is basically the most aggressive version of randori, minus perhaps "1) uke attacks as if he has a very personal matter with you," though that could be a matter of interpretation.
Stress-testing is in "Aikido" in a variety of ways. From what little I can tell, the Shodokan system in particular has a very well-defined randori program, ranging from very easy-going to quite intense. When I factor in the large number of dojos which emphasize effectiveness and then those which cross-train in "more aggressive" systems, I don't worry about it too much.

I think Aikido has the reputation it does for similar reasons Tai Chi has the reputation it does (with regard to being often considered to be more healthy exercise than martial practice). In both cases there are examples of some very effective and reasonable approaches to handling aggression and there are examples where other goals take precedence. In both cases it depends on the nature of the individual practice more than the nature of the art itself.

You would probably like this example of Seagal's shodan test. What you describe is basically the most aggressive version of randori, minus perhaps "1) uke attacks as if he has a very personal matter with you," though that could be a matter of interpretation.
Stress-testing is in "Aikido" in a variety of ways. From what little I can tell, the Shodokan system in particular has a very well-defined randori program, ranging from very easy-going to quite intense. When I factor in the large number of dojos which emphasize effectiveness and then those which cross-train in "more aggressive" systems, I don't worry about it too much.

I think Aikido has the reputation it does for similar reasons Tai Chi has the reputation it does (with regard to being often considered to be more healthy exercise than martial practice). In both cases there are examples of some very effective and reasonable approaches to handling aggression and there are examples where other goals take precedence. In both cases it depends on the nature of the individual practice more than the nature of the art itself.

I had exactly that video in mind as the closest example that could come to my memory. I even thought of providing the very same link for illustration purposes (at least to say I wasn't really inventing anything) but I did not want to post thrice in a round.
Anyway, I am glad that I managed to express myself "clearly" enough to make somebody understand what type of approach I meant. It's not always easy to get a message through.

In my perception, this type of threads originates because Aikido is not implemented with that video's type of setting.

1) The fact Aikido has no competitions disincentivates martiality, by all accounts
2) The fact it is so difficult and objectively unpractical to be used in a fight (much easier, at least in theory, to throw punches)
3) the fact that it is (at least apparently, because in its reality it can be terrible) a mild "gentle" martial Art

these facts are what has let the mild, totally unrealistic, approach to Aikido prevail, and consequently these facts are what ought to be considered responsibile for originating this thread's type of accusations too.

The "accusation" in the title of this by now immensely popular thread is, in fact, true and accurate - otherwise why this topic should gain such popularity only in Aikido forums?

And the reason it is true is that Aikido was facing two paths - the mild one and the tougher one, and most dojos chose the former. For a variety of reasons (maximizing participants is one), and I don't mean they are disreputable: only, they are not martial reasons.
We have to admit that, and come to terms with it.

We are not victims of defamation: we are, to some consistent degree, responsibile of the state of things.

The accusation then may at times become unfair, or grotesque: but as long as a grotesque accusation may raise to its support abundant examples of (for instance) grotesque shihonages (with Senseis never intervening to say: "hey dude, this is not classical ballet duh... put some nuts & bolts in it - uke particularly!"), we are bound to succumb and to wield intellectual disonesty as our only way to the notorious and infamous road to «corporated denegation»: "there is no bug in our software"!

Because I am not led by self delusion and anger Mary. The point is there in clear sight: everybody who can see, sees it. Not just me.
Relax, and you will see it also. Because there must be a reason this type of thread gets produced only on Aikido forums. The explanation cannot be that, for unknown reasons, there is just a bigger amount of morons in aikido...

There are a lot of morons in aikido, but there are just as many in karate. Go to your average local karate tournament and you'll see guys in bright, multicolored costumes doing dance routines to music and calling it martial art, and winning awards for it. There are a lot of morons in martial arts, period.

And this question does not get produced only on aikido forums. I have seen it on taekwondo forums, BJJ forums, karate forums, etc., etc.

As I said a couple of pages ago, these issues and questions pervade all pajamas-and-colored-belts martial arts, not just aikido.

90% of a martial oriented training should not be geared to learn a proper techinique, but how to live within the thunderstorm.

What you're talking about is self-defense training, not a martial art. If the worst thing you can say about aikido is that an aikido class is not a self-defense class, then you have a weak argument indeed: we already knew that. It is no shock to anyone here that learning martial arts techniques and learning self-defense skills are not the same thing.

1) You train at a heavy pace with realistic pressure and resistance
2) Attacks in training are not predetermined

If you're training does not include a high-pressure form of randori that simulates the conditions of a realistic attack how is it reasonable to expect someone to be able to perform in a real situation?

Disregarding the argument of whether specific Aikido techniques are valid, being accustomed to responding to violence/pressure is more important that technical proficiency.

My own training does not include a high-pressure, full resistance form of randori. Although I wish it did, I realize that in a pressure situation I would be relying on my Judo. Does that invalidate my Jujutsu training? I don't feel it does, but I do believe improvements could certainly be made.

Watching my friend's baby crawl around the other day it occurred to me that they would never win an olympic gold medal sprint using those methods; I immediately insisted that my friend put running shoes on his child and send them out to the nearest running track at dawn every day.

I never realised how much of an imbecile my friend was until they replied that their child was going to learn to walk before trying to apply their ambulatory skills in a more serious and advanced setting.

What you're talking about is self-defense training, not a martial art. If the worst thing you can say about aikido is that an aikido class is not a self-defense class, then you have a weak argument indeed: we already knew that. It is no shock to anyone here that learning martial arts techniques and learning self-defense skills are not the same thing.

Yes to me Aikido must be effective in a martial contest - that is, by that I mean (for, apparently, also meanings of martial seem to vary) against sheer violence and brutality.

I understand your point and I don't contend it: you're entitled to it, and it is respectable.

In my case, however, I am on the page where the only purpose of aikido is that of performing as a self defense method, capable of meeting any challenge that pure violence may pose. Whatever spiritual side practicing aikido may accrue or produce, in my world proves its consistency only when put at the test against physical brutality.

I don't claim that my perspective is better: I am only saying that, in our specific case, we're on two different pages so it is unavoidable there cannot be an effective communications or, better, agreement between us.

In this context, however, I would like to add also that those who, like in this thread, say that aikido "does not work at all in a fight" are those who placed themseleves on my page: this is why I can "relate" with them and it comes, apparently, easier for me to understand the part of truth that is contained in the box of their accusations.

That type of accusation, in fact, does not arrive from a "world" like yours, but from a "world" like mine.
In this world of mine, I do not place myself among those who cast this accusation (perhaps you have misunderstood me like one?), but among those who understand the milieu whence it originated (and I am not alone there, not implying this).

1) You train at a heavy pace with realistic pressure and resistance
2) Attacks in training are not predetermined

If you're training does not include a high-pressure form of randori that simulates the conditions of a realistic attack how is it reasonable to expect someone to be able to perform in a real situation?